Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Consider the following statements with regards to the territorial extent of the Parliament and State Legislature. I. Parliament can make laws related to whole or any part of the Indian Territory II. State Legislature can make laws that would be applicable for the residents of the state even if they are not staying in the state presently. III. Parliament alone can make 'extra-territorial legislation' Which of the above statements is correct?

Consider the following statements with regards to the territorial extent of the Parliament and State Legislature. I. Parliament can make laws related to whole or any part of the Indian Territory II. State Legislature can make laws that would be applicable for the residents of the state even if they are not staying in the state presently. III. Parliament alone can make 'extra-territorial legislation' Which of the above statements is correct? Correct Answer I and III only

Indian Constitution has specified the territorial limits of the legislative powers of the Centre and State. Following are the details -

  • Parliament can make laws related to the whole or any part of the Indian Territory. The territory of India includes union territories, states, or any other area included in the territory of India for the time being. So, the statement I is correct.
  • Unlike the US, Indian doesn't have dual citizenship. Laws apply to the "citizens" and not residents. So, the statement II is wrong as the laws made by the State Legislature is applicable only in the state and not outside it.
  • Parliament alone has the power to make 'extra-territorial legislation'. This means that laws made by the Indian Parliament are applicable to Indian citizens and their properties outside India.
  • So, statement III is correct.

Related Questions

Consider the following statements:
1. Parliament shall, while a proclamation of Emergency is in operation, have the power to make laws of the whole or any part of territory of India with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the list
2. Parliament has exclusive power to make any law with respect to any matter not enumerated in the Concurrent List or State List
3. Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement, or convention with any other country
4. Parliament has power to legislate with respect to a matter in the State List in the national interest subject to the resolution passed by the Council of States by two-thirds majority
Which of these statements are correct?
The following are the conditions for selecting list of a suitable candidates to be called for interview after the written test for the recruitment is conducted/ organized for management-level persons of a multi-national company. For providing accounting services and sales the candidates must (a) be holding a graduation in basic science with 65% or above or B. E degree with 55% and above marks (b) have passed the written test with 70% or above marks (c) the age must be in the group 25 to 30 years as on 1/4/18 (d) have experience in an accounting firms for three years and diploma in accounting with 60% or above marks (e) be presently drawing CTC of 6 Lakhs per annum and above In case the applicant who satisfies all other terms above except 1) at (a) above, then be referred as Junior Accountant 2) at (d) & (e) above then be referred as Trainee-Accountant Satisfying all the above with experience of 5 years then be referred as senior-Accountant Satisfying all the above criteria (a-e) with CA/ ICWA / MBA (Finance) then be refereed as manager (Accounts) Read all the above information and answer the following question Shravani has passed H. SC with 72% of marks. She has done diploma in accountancy with 62% of marks. She was working with an organization in the field of accounting in the field of accounting from 4 years and was drawing CTC of 6.5 Lakhs presently. She is 28yrs as on July 2018. She may referred for the position of:
Which of the following is correct with respect to the extent of the laws made by the Parliament? 1. Parliament can make laws for the whole or any part of India. 2. The rules of Parliament are applicable to Indian citizens and their property in any part of the world.
Consider the following statements:
Whenever the question is whether a State Legislation has encroached upon the field of the Union Legislation, the Court will decide the competence of the Legislature and validity, of such legislation by applying
1. Repugnancy
2. Colourable legislation
3. Pith and substance
4. Harmonious construction
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
There are 150 residents in a society. Out of them, 50 residents own a motorcycle, 60 residents own a car and 20 residents own both a car and amotorcycle. How many residents neither own a motorcycle nor a car?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? Why do some French people think that Hindi is the only Indian language?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? The writer was working at a university in which country?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? What wrong with respect to India are the Europeans responsible for?
Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives.
Doing an internship at the University of Lille in France, I almost always found myself stuck whenever I had to speak to non-Indians about India or on anything'Indian'. This was more because of the subtle differences in the way the French understood India in comparison to what I thought was 'Indian'. For instance, when I,or any Indian for that matter, say 'Hindi' is an Indian language, what it means is that it is one of the languages widely spoken in India. This need not be similar tothe understanding that the French would have when they hear of 'Hindi' as an Indian language. Because for them Hindi then becomes the only language spoken inIndia. This is a natural inference that the French, Germans, Italians and many other European nationals would tend to make, because that is generally how it is intheir own respective countries. The risk of such inappropriate generalisations made about 'Indian' is not restricted to language alone but also for India's landscape,cuisine, movies, music, climate, economic development and even political ideologies. The magnitude of diversity of one European country can be easily compared tothat of one of the Indian State, isn't it? Can they imagine that India is one country whose diversity can be equated to that of the entire European continent? Theonus is upon us to go ahead and clarify the nuances in 'Indianness' while we converse. But why should one do so? How does it even matter to clarify? According to the writer the responsibility of explaining the facts about India to Europeans rests with?
Which one of the following is true with respect to the law-making rights of the state? A) The Parliament can also make laws on the subjects of the State List if the Legislature of two or more states comes to the conclusion that Parliament can lawfully make laws on the subjects of the State List related to those States. B) Any Act passed by Parliament shall apply to such States and any other State which passes such resolutions. C) The Parliament also has the authority to amend or repeal such Acts.